Going to be hard to stop the Train.

I have provided more than enough evidence

 

If someone is shot in the head, but does not die as a result, do we conclude that firearms cannot kill anyone, and thus there is no reason to try and restrict their access to anyone?

 

If you did you would be falling into the same fallacy of small numbers as Chuck. Thanks for making my point.

 

You have presented absolutely nothing but your own idealistic outlook on the situation, coupled with an admitted inability to explain what does work and what does not work. You have made nothing available for review, other than claims about other nations around the world.

 

Thank you for your opinion

 

Your point is not being made, it is being attacked and ridiculed for being ludicrous.

 

We have a national gun homicide rate of 3.4 per 100,000 people. Why do you have to break it down by states? Or Cities? Why are you crowing about Chicago rankings?
Are you not falling into the fallacy of small numbers? Shouldn't the National rate tell us all we need to know about gun homicide.

 

Now compare our gun homicide rate to any first world nation with gun control. You pick.

 

First compare their gun homicide rate before gun control and see if it made a dent.

 

Why would I do that? It may have been decades ago and not relevant to today at all. Why are you afraid to compare today?

 

The truth is that you have no idea if there was any improvement in the stats after gun control laws were implemented.

 

I think it's time for a real world test....don't you?

 

Thanks for admitting that you have no evidence as to its performance.

 

Lots of evidence. You want proof which does not exist anywhere

 

You always have tour 2 States and Chicago.

 

I have no idea what that means

 

The reason why you would do that is so that way you can conclude whether gun control actually did anything. If it didn't then there's no need to repeat a failed experiment again here. What was the definition of insanity again?

- - - Updated - - -

List some evidence. Two or three would be fine.

 

It would not be a valid test. Lets do it know and then measure it

I have already

 

I'll put up a sign announcing that I have guns at my house if you'll post a sign that say's your home is gun free.

 

Sure. Let them try to get past my dog. LOL

 

A dog ultimately goes from an early warning system to a bullet magnet in that order.

 

That's why I have 4 dogs of various size to distract criminals and flush them out while I shoot them. Dogs are a great warning system and deterrent, but they are not very good for defense without them being trained and using multiple dogs. Without training and testing, you don't know how well they will do. I love my dogs and take good care of them, but compared to my family, they are expendable.

 

You never met my dog. LOL

 

Irrelevant nonsense. All dogs can be killed in short order, rendering them a useless method of threat deterrent.

 

The train is gaining momentum CHOOO CHOOO
http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2017/01/2016-record-year-for-nics-background.html?m=1